One thing to keep in mind as we look at receivers. The receiver positions are not interchangeable. They are scheme specific and require different skill sets. We all recognize this with the slot, but are less inclined to differentiate with the split end and flanker positions.

Rice is our flanker. That means he lines up on the same side as the TE and is required by formation to line up off the line of scrimmage. The flanker is usually the faster and more finesse receiver. Because of the builtin cushion, he is less likely to be jammed at the LOS, but needs to have the giddy up to eat up that cushion quickly. Because of the head start running, he also tends to be the big play, downfield threat

What we a looking for is a split end. He plays opposite the TE and is required by formation to line up ON the LOS. He is frequently physically abused, and is also usually the best blocker, as he has to play the role of the TE on running plays to his side. This player is usually bigger and more physical, but the last two years we have used Golden Tate here, because even though he is small, he's our best blocking WR and most able to beat the jam because of his agility. But it's also why we had Braylon Edwards in . . . Big physical WR. This position also tends to run more slants and crosses and hooks.

So when we are looking at WR's, recognize that we are primarily looking for a split end. Size, hysicality, blocking are more important than pure speed. The ability to make the tough play in traffic.

Last edited by McGruff on Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Good stuff. Although, to be fair, we don't use Rice as exclusively as a "Z" (flanker). He does line up on the LOS a lot, and opposite of the TE. They have become more diverse with formations and concepts and I think that trumps the specific positional assignments.

Here is one example vs Chicago (first picture). You can see Sidney on the LOS in the left slot and Golden flanked outside. Zah Miller is tight on the LOS to the right and McCoy is split wide on the right.

The other unique thing about our receivers is I think Golden Tate is our "deep threat", which is also usually supposed to be your flanker. The flanker is the predominate guy targeted for WR screens as well, but in our case it's Golden (our "X" or split end).

Good point. Versatility is a plus and probably a must, and when talking about differences, you are talking about percentage points, not vast differences. All receivers will generally be within a similar spectrums of size and speed.

But still, I think the pursuit of guys like Edwards and Bryant to compete with Tate shows that the staff would prefer a certain kind of body at split end.

McGruff wrote:Good point. Versatility is a plus and probably a must, and when talking about differences, you are talking about percentage points, not vast differences. All receivers will generally be within a similar spectrums of size and speed.

But still, I think the pursuit of guys like Edwards and Bryant to compete with Tate shows that the staff would prefer a certain kind of body at split end.

Agreed... I love Tate, but we are missing that big body like a Julio Jones/AJ Green type that can really assert themselves downfield. Tate has the flexibility to move between the slot, split end and flanker position, IMO.

McGruff wrote:Seems to me that Rice got more screens this year than Golden, but that could be wrong perception on my end.

No, it was Golden for sure. We didn't run a lot of smoke screens - mostly bubbles to Golden. Rice had a few, but we threw one or two to Tate pretty much every game - at least through the first 10-11 games when the offense was finding its way.

Scottemojo told me the best way to scout any player is to focus on the area STRICTLY between the belt and thigh pads. When I asked "why, that doesn't make sense?", he got mad at me and yelled "dont you want to learn?".

He also washed his hands alot and fidgeted in his chair. With no shirt, have you.

I dont know guys, I'm just not sure if scouting's for me. I felt really uncomfortable.

Hawkfan77 wrote:I think your OP needs a little bit of editing. Great writeup, but you use flanker to describe both flanker and split end.

Fixed. Thanks for the heads up.

No problem, like I said that's perfect for those of us who like to watch tape on the draftees. The team is obviously looking for a WR, but we gotta also look at where the WR will play and his fit in our scheme. Thanks

Scottemojo told me the best way to scout any player is to focus on the area STRICTLY between the belt and thigh pads. When I asked "why, that doesn't make sense?", he got mad at me and yelled "dont you want to learn?".

He also washed his hands alot and fidgeted in his chair. With no shirt, have you.

I dont know guys, I'm just not sure if scouting's for me. I felt really uncomfortable.

Scottemojo told me the best way to scout any player is to focus on the area STRICTLY between the belt and thigh pads. When I asked "why, that doesn't make sense?", he got mad at me and yelled "dont you want to learn?".

He also washed his hands alot and fidgeted in his chair. With no shirt, have you.

I dont know guys, I'm just not sure if scouting's for me. I felt really uncomfortable.

Scottemojo told me the best way to scout any player is to focus on the area STRICTLY between the belt and thigh pads. When I asked "why, that doesn't make sense?", he got mad at me and yelled "dont you want to learn?".

He also washed his hands alot and fidgeted in his chair. With no shirt, have you.

I dont know guys, I'm just not sure if scouting's for me. I felt really uncomfortable.

Great OP. I learned something today. That said, I suspect that PC/JS won't be locked into adding a flanker. Flanker isn't even our most upgradable position at WR- the slot position is. We also need depth for Sidney Rice, and depth overall. Short of them drafting two slot WRs and calling it a draft, I could see almost anything happening.

I do think they will target quick WRs though. Last year's WR class was considered very strong but JS panned it. The only logical reason? It was dominated by big/slow WRs. JS has talked up this WR class and it's not surprising: it's full of quick WRs with good size.

Last edited by kearly on Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kearly wrote:Great OP. I learned something today. That said, I suspect that PC/JS won't be locked into adding a flanker. Flanker isn't even our most upgradable position at WR- the slot position is. We also need depth for Sidney Rice, and depth overall. Short of them drafting two slot WRs and calling it a draft, I could see almost anything happening.

I agree - I just think they look at things totally different than the conventional. They have proved it over and over again.

McGruff wrote:Seems to me that Rice got more screens this year than Golden, but that could be wrong perception on my end.

I'd say it's about even for the 2. Early in the Year Rice got a few screens. But by mid-season nearly all of the screens went to Tate. Infact for 3 games we threw more screens than the rest of the year combined. Tate got most of those. Though we seemed to go away from the quick screens right around the time the read-option became more prevalent.

After that shift away we saw a few more screens to Rice. So I would that the split between Rice and Tate on Screens would be even or would favor Tate by a few.